Central Administrative Tribunal - Ernakulam
Ajith S.B vs Southern Naval Command on 18 May, 2016
Author: P.Gopinath
Bench: P.Gopinath
Central Administrative Tribunal
Ernakulam Bench
OA No.1075/13
Wednesday, this the 18th day of May, 2016
CORAM
Hon'ble Mr.Justice N.K.Balakrishnan, Judicial Member
Hon'ble Mrs.P.Gopinath, Administrative Member
1. Ajith S.B.
S/o Surendra Babu
Ajith Bhavan
Darsanavattam, Altharamoodu PO
Attingal, Thiruvananthapuram
2. Anilan Vrindavanam M
S/o Muraleedharan Pillai G.,
Vrindavanam
Kovoor, Palayamkunnu PO
Varkala, Thiruvananthapuram.
3. Sumesh S.
S/o Surendran K, Panikkakkudi
Puthenveedu, Nadaivanam,
Nedumparambu PO
Thiruvananthapuram-695 102 . . . . . Applicants
(By Advocate: Mr.N. Manoj Kumar)
Versus
1. Southern Naval Command
represented by the Flag Officer
Commanding in Chief
Headquarters, Southern Naval Command
Naval Base, Cochin-682 004.
2. Chief Staff Officer
Southern Naval Command
Headquarters, Cochin-682 004.
3. Tineema Babu
Electro plater (SK), Process Shop
Naval Aircraft Yard, Naval Base
Cochin-682 004.
4. Rajeev R.
Electro plater (SK), Process Shop
Naval Aircraft Yard,
Naval Base, Cochin-682 004.
5. Union of India represented by
the Secretary to Government of India
Ministry of Defence
Sena Bhavan, New Delhi.
6. Aneesh V
Thudiveedu, Chempakamangalam
Korani, Attingal
Thiruvananthapuram-695 104. . . . . . Respondents
By Advocate:
Mr. N.Anil Kumar, Sr. PCGC for R1, 2 & 5
Mr.M.R.Hariraj for R3&4
Mr.V.V.Nandagopal Nambiar for R6
The OA having been finally heard on 15 th March, 2016, this Tribunal
delivered the following order on 18th May 2016:
ORDER
By P.Gopinath, Administrative Member The three applicants in this OA challenge the selection and appointment of respondents 3 & 4 as Electro plater. According to the applicants, respondents 3 & 4 did not satisfy the selection criteria including the qualifications prescribed whereas the applicants satisfied all the eligibility criteria. It is stated that a Note contained in Annexure A24 Recruitment Rules was used by the respondents to give credence to the selection and appointment of respondents 3 & 4. Hence this OA.
2. The first respondent had issued Annexure A1 recruitment notice inviting applications from qualified candidates for being considered for appointment for 12 posts under the 1 st respondent. Item 8 in the recruitment notice pertained to recruitment of Electro plater (SK) in the scale of pay of Rs.5200-20200. The notified vacancies were four. The essential qualifications prescribed were (i) matriculation or equivalent from a recognized Institution or Board with knowledge of English and (ii) should have completed Apprenticeship training in the trade of Mechanic or equivalent with two years' regular service in the appropriate Technical Branch of the Army, Navy and Air Force. The applicants who had applied for the post, aver that they were fully qualified for being considered for appointment. The applicant were called for a written test on 19.09.2013 followed by an interview on 20.09.2013. Applicants were under the impression that they would be called for practical test and were likely to get selected since they had performed well in the written test and interview. The applicants now learn that the 1st and 2nd respondents selected and appointed respondents 3 & 4 and 2 others for the post of Electro plater without conducting a practical test. Among the 4 selected persons, respondents 3 & 4 did not possess the requisite qualifications Both respondents 3 & 4 did not complete apprenticeship training in the trade of Electro plater. They do not possess the alternate qualification of mechanic or equivalent with two years' regular service in the appropriate technical branch of the Army, Navy and Air Force. Applicants aver that respondents 1 & 2 relaxed the qualifications required for direct recruits for selection to the post of Tradesman skilled under Annexure A24 Recruitment Rules. Therefore, this OA is filed challenging the appointment of respondents 3 & 4. The applicants pray for a declaration that the Note to item (7) Educational and other qualifications required for direct recruits for selection to the post of Tradesman skilled under the Integrated Headquarters Ministry of Defence (Navy) Group-C posts (Tradesmen) Recruitment Rules 2012 is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and unconstitutional and the same be struck down.
3. Applicants admit in Ground-D that Article 309 of the Constitution regulates the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to public services and post in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State. The proviso to the Article gives power to the President or the Governor of a State to make rules regulating the recruitment and the conditions of service of persons appointed until provision in that behalf is made by or under an Act of the appropriate Legislature and any rules so made shall have effect subject to the provisions of such Act. However, the applicants contend that the power conferred under Article 309 of the Constitution is to make rules subject to the provisions of the Constitution. Any rule if it violates the equality clause mandated by the Constitution is discriminatory. Applicants also contend that there is no estoppel against Constitution and they are entitled to challenge the rules after participating in the selection process. Applicants admit that persons who are appointed as Electro plater have to work in the Naval Air Craft Yard, undertake repairs, overhauling and maintenance of Naval Aircrafts located at Kochi. The electroplating shop of electrical department undertakes copper plating, chromium plating, nickel plating, silver plating and silver striking of various articles like oil distributers, inner case assembly, aircraft nuts and bolts, electrical conduct of starters and circuit breakers. The apprenticeship training is mandatory and without the practical knowledge in electroplating, a person cannot be appointed to the post of Electro plater. The following reliefs are sought in the OA:-
(i) To declare that Note to item (7) Educational and other qualifications required for direct recruits for selection to the post of Tradesman skilled under the integrated Headquarters Ministry of Defence (Navy) Group-C posts (Tradesmen) Recruitment Rules, 2012 is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, ultra vires of the powers conferred under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and strike down the same;
(ii) Direct the respondents 1 & 2 to appoint the applicants to the post of Electroplater (SK) under the 1 st respondent in accordance with their rank in the selection process.
4. Respondents 3 & 4 in their reply statement aver that Union of India is not a party in the OA, hence the OA is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties and liable to be dismissed. It is also submitted that Annexue A24 Recruitment Rule is dated 18.5.2012. A challenge on the same at this distant point of time is barred by limitation. There is no stipulation whatsoever that practical test would be conducted in all cases. Annexure A1 stipulates practical test wherever applicable. Annexure A24 Recruitment Rules do not provide for a practical test. In fact during the interview the candidates who participated were asked to perform certain practical experiments having relevance to the trade. The respondents 3 & 4 had performed those experiments to the satisfaction of the Selection Board. It is also submitted that applicants may be put to strict proof regarding the veracity of the various certificates produced. The 3 rd respondents is a graduate in Bachelor of Engineering. The 3 rd respondent had worked as a unpaid apprentice for a year in Canara Electroplating Works ( a private firm) [Annexure R3 (b)]. The 3 rd respondent being a graduate of aeronautical engineering had very good exposure in the field. The 4 th respondent was a matriculate and was a holder of Diploma in Electrical Engineering He has also completed one year apprenticeship at BSES Kerala Pvt Ltd [Annexure R3(e)]. Electroplating is an area covered in Diploma in Electrical Engineering. He had sufficient experience and exposure in the filed. He performed well and was selected and appointed based on his merit. Based on the statutory rules governing the field, it was permissible for the appointing authority to relax the qualifications prescribed under Column 7. Annexue A23 had been issued in bona fide and fair exercise of this discretion. Being satisfied with the performance of the 6 th respondent and others, the selected candidates were posted as Electro plater (SK). The syllabus for Electro plater was prepared as per Navy order (civilian 01/2007). The 6 th respondent had completed national trade certificate from ITI, Attingal in the trade of Electro plater [Annexure R6(a)]. He had undergone 1 year apprenticeship in Keltron from 7.11.2006 to 6.11.2007 [Annexue R6(b)]. He had sufficient working experience in the field in India and abroad.
5. Official respondents resist the OA contending inter-alia that the marks scored in the interview by the applicants was 15, 14 and 17 respectively whereas the 3rd and 4th respondents had scored 18 and 16 marks respectively thereby aggregating 78.4 and 61 marks respectively. The applicants, on the other hand, scored an aggregate of 57, 48.2 and 57.2 respectively. The selection for the post was made, based on the overall performance of the candidates in the written test, practical evaluation and personal interview. The applicants had been provided equal opportunity for participation in all the three rounds of selection along with the respondents 3 & 4. However, they could not succeed in the selection process due to their under performance. It is further submitted that notification for filling O4 vacancies of Electro plater (Skilled) was published in the Employment News dated 25-31 May 2013 as at Annexue A1. In response to the notification, a total of 152 applications were received against the 4 vacancies (General 3 & OBC 1. Scrutiny of the applications received was carried out as per Recruitment Rules for Tradesman skilled published in Gazette of India dated 9 th June 2012 and only 9 candidates (General 4 & OBC 5) were found to be eligible as per qualifications and age limit prescribed in the notification. Considering the provisions contained in Note to item (7) of the Recruitment Rules as per which the qualifications are relaxable at the discretion of the Appointing Authority in the case of candidates otherwise well qualified, four more candidates who were not only highly qualified and were also qualified in the subject of electroplating were also included in the list for consideration of candidates for selection as Electro plater mainly taking into consideration of the following aspects:-
(a) the less turn out of candidates for the post of Electro plater is attributable to existence of only one Industrial Training Institute located at Thiruvananthapuram conducting the electroplating course and the upper age limit prescribed for the post is 25 years for general candidates and 28 years for OBC candidates.
b) Candidates possessing the higher qualifications of T.Tech, BE in Aeronautical Engineering and 3 years' Diploma in Electrical Engineering were also included as the subjects of electrical and electrochemical (electroplating) also were included in their course of study.
(c) Of the 4 candidates included over and above nine candidates who fulfill the eligibility criteria, two are lady candidates. As per Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions Memo dated 8th July 2009 special provisions in the Rules and Regulations for increasing the representation of women in the Central government jobs are to be made and these provisions had to be made applicable while including the 2 lady candidates for selection(Annexure R1).
d) The vacancies of Electro plater exists at Naval Aircraft Yard Kochi and this is the only aviation establishment of the Indian Navy to undertake repair, overhaul and maintenance of all Western aircrafts of the Navy.
New process shop for electroplating at NAY was set up on 18 th February 1988. The new plant was imported from PMD Company, UK and installed through contract by Douty Company, UK which is so sophisticated and modern precise plant that includes conversion of cyanide to cyanate and effluent treatment plant.
6. The employees from NAY Kochi were trained at Douty, UK for operation of new new machine and plant. This process plant undertakes the plating works of cadmium, hard chromium, anodizing, copper and silver etc., on various aircraft components like landing gear, pistons, undercarriages, bolts etc. In order to achieve quality work with precision, the procedures laid down in Air Publication are to be strictly followed by reading each procedure for every repair scheme before undertaking the job, for which the knowledge of English with technical acumen is required. Highly qualified candidates who can read and understand the procedure in the Air Publication for adopting in the process of operation, therefore, were desirable.
7. After considering all the above aspects, call letters were issued to all the 13 candidates on 23rd August 2013 for written examination, practical test and interview to be conducted on 19 th September 2013. The list of candidates issued with call letters for appearing in the test along with their complete details are produced and annexed as Annexure R-2. Syllabus for Electro plater (SK) was prepared as per Navy Order (Civilian) 01/2007 with instructions for filling the OMR answer sheets for candidates' awareness in the subject prior to the test. A Board of Officers consisting 05 Officers was constituted to conduct the recruitment process including the written examination, practical test and interview as per Annexure R4 HQ Southern Naval Command Memorandum No.CS 2700/CR/ST-2(0l/l3) dated 10 th September 2013. Of the 13 candidates who were issued call letters, only 08 candidates (General 5 & OBC 3) reported for written examination on 19th September 2013. The details of educational/technical qualifications, apprenticeship/training and experience of the candidates appeared for the written test are marked as Annexure R5. The selection process for the post of Electro plater consists of written examination, practical test and interview and marks allotted for the tests are 50. 30 and 20 respectively totaling 100 marks. The Board of Officers conducted the practical test and interview for the post on 20th September, 2013 as per guidelines and evaluation sheets provided to them. A copy of guidelines issued to the Board of Officers for conducting the selection process is produced as Annexure R-6. All the 08 candidates appeared for the written examination were shortlisted for practical test and interview irrespective of the marks obtained by them in the written examination. The marks scored in the written examination by applicants l, 2 and 3 were 22, 19 and l8 respectively out of the total 50 marks and applicant did not score 50% marks. Respondents 3 and 4 scored 32 and 25 marks respectively. The Board of Officers comprising five officers individually assessed the performance of each of the candidates in practical test and endorsed marks in practical evaluation sheet and finally average of the marks given by the five officers is considered as the marks scored by the candidate in the practical test. After compiling the marks scored by each of the candidate in the written examination , practical test and personal interview, the Board of Officers prepared a select list of 04 candidates (General - 03 and OBC O1) and a reserve list of 04 candidates (General O2 and OBC 02). While 1st applicant, 2nd applicant and 3rd applicants scored total marks of 57, 48.2 and 57.2 respectively out of the total 100 marks, 3 rd respondent and 4th respondent scored 78.4 nd 61 marks respectively out of 100. Hence the respondents were superior to applicants in so far as total marks scored.
8. The practical test for the post of Electro plater (SK) in the laboratory using chemicals is not possible to be conducted since it is too expensive to the exchequer and once the process starts, it takes 12 to 48 hours to complete it. In the electroplating process, poisonous/hazardous acids like sulfuric acid and cyanides are used and can be dangerous with possible mishaps if a novice is engaged in the process as the respondent is not sure about the candidate's practical knowledge of electroplating process. Moreover, it is not advisable to utilize serviceable and high value aircraft components for this test purpose. Hence competent authority/Board of Officers decided to conduct the practical test as per the yardsticks prescribed in the practical evaluation sheet which was applied in common for all the candidates. The basis for selection of the 3 rd and 4th respondents is their relative performance in the written test, practical test and interview. The applicants also were given equal opportunity to compete for selection to the post but their performance resulted in their finding a place in the reserve list instead of the select list. The main contention of the applicants is that the 3 rd and 4th respondents possess higher qualifications than prescribed for the post of Electro plater (SK) and so the provisions at Note to item (7) in the Recruitment Rules giving discretionary powers to the Appointing Authority to relax qualifications of the candidates otherwise well qualified should not be resorted or made applicable. This contention is unsustainable because the Apex Court in the decision reported as Jyoti.K.K. & Others Vs Kerala Public Service Commission & Others (JT 2002 [Suppl.1] SC 85 held that 'If a person had acquired higher qualifications in the same faculty, such qualification can certainly be stated to presuppose the acquisition of the lower qualifications prescribed for the post and therefore procedures do not disqualify per se the holders of higher qualifications in the same faculty for responding to applications.'
9. The marks scored in the interview by 1 st applicant, 2nd applicant and the 3rd applicant was 15, 14 and 17 respectively, while 3 rd respondent and 4th respondent had scored 18 and 16 marks respectively in the interview thereby aggregating 78.4 marks and 61 marks respectively whereas 1 st applicant, 2nd applicant and the 3rd applicant had an aggregate score of 57, 48.2 and 57.2 respectively. The selection for the post was made, based on the overall performance of the candidates in the written test, practical evaluation and personal interview. All the three applicants in the OA herein were provided equal opportunity along with 3 rd and 4th respondent to show their worth to be selected for the post.
10. The contention of the applicants that apprenticeship is a compulsory qualification is incorrect and misleading. Apprenticeship is compulsory in the case of ITI certificate holders which is a 24 months course whereas diploma is a 36 months course and BE is a 48 months course and are higher technical qualifications than ITI certificate.
11. Recruitment Rules for Electro plater (SK) do not impose any restriction for considering candidates with higher qualifications. This post requires high technical skill and so persons with higher qualifications are more ideal since the job involves safety of Aircrafts. In July 2012 also, the same method was adopted for practical test while resorting to recruitment of Electroplater (SK). Equality of opportunity in the matter of selection for employment has been provided to to the applicants as well by giving them opportunity to compete with other applicants in the selection process and no discrimination whatsoever has been meted out to them.
12. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and respondents and perused the written submissions made. The main issue for consideration in this OA is whether the party respondents were rightly selected for the post applied for or was there any malafides in the selection process?
13. The applicants in para 8 of the OA admit that Group C (Tradesman) Recruitment Rule 2012 has a Note under column 7 which states as follows:-
'Note: Qualification are relaxable at the discretion of the Appointing Authority in the case of candidates otherwise well qualified.' The three phrases to be noted in the above Note in Column 7 are 'Qualifications are relaxable', 'discretion of the appointing authority', and 'in the case of candidates otherwise well qualified'. The recruitment rules which are statutory in nature, contain the above additional operative conditions, which vests the appointing authority with powers to invoke the same. The party respondents have averred that the above Note does not confer any unbridled discretion. The appointing authority, under whom the candidates who had applied for the job, were to work, are the authority to conduct recruitment for the post, albeit as per Recruitment Rules. There is a multiplicity of courses and certification in the field of skilled workman and it would be impossible to exhaustively enumerate all possible qualifications. Hence the clause 'in case of candidates otherwise well qualified' has been incorporated in the Recruitment Rules. The statutory rule making authority has thought it fit to confer the discretion on the appointing authority. We also note that the rule making authority in the matter under consideration is the Indian Navy which is a responsible arm of the Armed Forces of the country, capable of assessing its defence requirements and persons who will maintain the defence equipment.
14. The respondents aver that the the selection process for the post of Electro plater comprises a written examination, practical test and interview and the marks allotted are 50, 30 and 20 respectively totaling 100 marks. The Board of Officers constituted by the respondent conducted the practical test and interview for the post on 20 th Sept, 2013 as per guidelines for recruitment to the post and this was supported by evaluation sheets to assess the candidates. The guidelines provided to the evaluation board is marked as Annexure R6. The important points noted from Annexure R6 are:
'8. Short listing of candidates for the practical test and interview will be based on marks scored in the written examination in the ratio of 1:3 according to vacancy ad category.' xxxxxxx
10. Practical test and interview will be conducted in a suitable place/room as decided by the board and results finalized on the same day as far as possible.' For the Electro plater practical test the evaluation chart has charted the following;
'Evaluation Chart (To be filled only by Board President/Member with Ballpoint Pen) SL NO. ACTIVITIES/SUBJECTS MAXIMUM MARKS REMARKS MARKS OBTAINED (a) Proficiency in identification of 5 major states of material in terms of their chemical properties (b) Proficiency in identification of 5 various equipment/measurement devices of voltage, current, AD/DC circuits etc.
(c) Knowledge of various surface 5 preparation techniques
(d) Knowledge on application of 5 various plating processes
(e) Precautions to be carried out whilst 5 undertaking electroplating (f) Knowledge and identification of 5 various fire fighting equipment TOTAL MARKS 30 For Electro Plater interview the evaluation was as follows:
Electro plater (SK)
(a) 1/3 marks out of 20 will be given for attendance - 7
(b) Academic qualification (Original documentary evidence) - 2
(c) Professional qualification/Experience (Original documentary evidence) - 2
(d) Professional knowledge about the work carried out in the organization for which experience certificate produced - 2
(e) Total Awareness of Profession in Electroplating - 3 (f) General knowledge/India Navy/Defence - 2 (g) Communication skill 2 Total - 20
15. Hence the guidelines for the practical test and interview were clearly laid down with marking indicated against each criteria and this is found reflected in Annexure R8 consolidated mark sheet which is reproduced below:-
S.No. Roll No. Name Category Written Practical Interview Total Remarks Marks Marks Marks (50) (30) (20) (100) 1 111002 Tineema GEN/UR 32 28.4 18 78.4 Selected in Babu Gen/UR Category/ Quota 2 111013 Rajeev R OBC 25 20 16 61 Selected in OBC Category/ Quota 3 111005 Manjesh M Gen/UR 15 26.2 17.4 58.6 Selected in Gen/UR Category/ Quota 4 111006 Santhosh N.S. Gen/UR 16 26 15.6 57.6 Selected in Gen/UR Category/ Quota 5 111003 Sumesh S. Gen/UR 18 22.2 17 57.2 Placed in Reserve List 6 111004 Anilan Gen/UR 19 15.2 14 48.2 Placed in Vrindavanam Reserve M List 7 111008 Ajith S.B. OBC 22 20 15 57 Placed in Reserve List 8 111009 Aneesh V OBC 12 22.8 15.6 50.4 Placed in Reserve List
16. Against the applicants' contention that no practical test was conducted or evaluated, it is noted from Annexure R8 above that all 8 candidates including the three applicants in the OA were marked for written examination, practical and interview and total of all 3 tests are shown thereon with their selection or otherwise for appointment also indicated. These facts counter the averment of the applicants that they were not subjected to any practical test and the marking also reveals the ranking of the applicants and the party respondents. The respondent vide Annexure R9(b) also produces the practical test marks of first selected candidate Tineema Babu who is a party respondent in the case, wherein the details of practical test conducted are listed with marking made thereon. The candidate obtained 28/30 marks in the practical test. Annexure R8 and Annexure R9(b) set at rest the allegation of non- conducting of the practical test as prescribed for recruitment. It is not for the Tribunal to look into whether the right questions were asked. It is for the respondents to ensure that they conduct the test as per recruitment rules, job requirement and criteria and in a manner that allows for appropriate assessment of candidates. Similar assessment sheets of all other candidates for interview has also been produced. Both the assessment sheets have the thumb impression and signature of the candidate and the applicants in this OA.
17. The applicants in MA 930/2014 bring out on 2/9/2014 that the respondents are taking hasty steps to appoint one Sri Aneesh V who has secured 50.4 marks as Electro plater in spite of the fact that he has secured lower rank than the 1st and 3rd applicants. The respondents in their reply bring out that one candidate Sri Rajeev.R., was appointed against OBC quota. The said candidate submitted his technical resignation from the post of Electro plater skilled w.e.f., 10th August 2014. The next eligible OBC candidate from the reserve list was Sri Aneesh V., who scored 57 marks (written 22, practical 20 and interview 15) and was considered for appointment. Respondents submit that 1st applicant in the OA has scored a total of 50.4 (written 12, practical 22.8 and interview 15.6) as against Aneesh who scored 57 marks and hence was not eligible for appointment on account of scoring lesser marks. The respondents also admit that while producing the details of the marks scored by the above 2 candidates, the marks scored by 1 st applicant in the OA and above Aneesh were interchanged and the respondents have produced the OMR answer sheets of the two persons as Annexure R16 and R17 as testimonies of actual marks scored by the two persons. The key of the OMR sheet was also produced so that applicant could verify the facts stated. The mistake was, according to respondents, a typographical error which the respondents regretted and tendered an unconditional apology for the same.
18. The 6th respondent in the reply statement submits that during interview he was asked to perform certain 'practical performance' (sic) having relevance to the trade. A Board of Experts comprising five officers conducted the recruitment process.
19. The applicants were selected for a job in the Indian Navy which works in war like preparatory conditions. The respondents are not likely to select candidates who do not qualify their stringent recruitment conditions. The respondents have selected candidates with higher qualification of degree and diploma as against the recruitment rule condition of Apprenticeship training in the trade. But the respondents were enabled in this act by the note below the recruitment rule column 7 which stated that, qualifications are relaxable at the discretion of the appointing authority, in the case of candidates otherwise well qualified.
20. The respondents cite the judgment of High Court of Kerala in OP (CAT) 32997 of 2000 filed by K.Aji against the CAT Ernakulam order in OA 969/2000 dated 5th Sept 2000 filed by Mary A.S., wherein it was held:-
'It is pointed out that the applicant in OA 969 of 2000 was an average candidate and had to give way to superior candidates and therefore there was no arbitrariness shown. Unless it is shown that applicant in OA 969 of 2000 had been excluded because of any mala fide motive or arbitrariness, it may not be possible for the Court to consider the selection process as irrational and at this juncture, we may also notice that such a procedure cannot be faulted at all, as the effort was to get meritorious candidates. The position, therefore, was that she had lost her rights to challenge selection and it was irrelevant whether or not selected candidates were having qualifications higher than those prescribed.'
21. The other issue raised by the applicants is that for 4 notified vacancies, nine candidates possessing essential qualifications were available and hence there was no need to expand the qualified candidate list by relaxing the condition. The respondents being one of the three arms of the armed forces were enabled by the relaxing condition in the recruitment rules to invoke the same and examine the eligibility of candidates with higher qualification like B.Tech., B.E., in Aeronautical Engineering and 3 year Diploma in Electrical Engineering, through the written exam, interview and practical test. This also enabled them to have a larger list for making selection. The subject matter of above educational qualifications would have been reflected in the marks sheet for the respondents to make an assessment of their suitability for the job. The job content, according to respondents, had undergone a change due to induction of better technology in the form of a new machine and plant from UK for which the earlier employees were trained at Douty in UK. The respondents would argue that in order to use the new plating process to achieve quality work with precision, the procedure laid down in Air Publication are to be strictly followed by reading each procedure for every repair scheme before undertaking the job, for which knowledge of English and technical acumen is required. Candidates selected were to meet the above requirements which the enabling clause had covered and permitted.
22. When the respondents were selected under the relaxation clause provided in the statutory recruitment rules, their appointment has to be treated as having been made as under the rules. The power of relaxation was contained in the rules and may have been incorporated to meet specific situation, which in this case related to induction of new technology from UK. The power of relaxation should be exercised in a just and equitable manner. In this case it was done to enlarge the scope of candidates so as to have a larger and better qualified field of selection. The so enlarged field was tested by a suitably constituted Recruitment Board in written test, practical test and interview and all the persons shortlisted went through the uniform process in a equitable manner.
23. Judicial review of administrative action is intended to prevent arbitrariness, irrationality, bias and malafide. Judicial review is not an appeal from a decision but a review of the manner in which the decision is made. In view of facts and circumstances of the case, we find no merit in the petition. OA is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(P.Gopinath) (N.K.Balakrishnan) Administrative Member Judicial Member aa.